[Mefustae]

Becoming top dog in any ecosystem requires a fair bit of balls. One of the reason we've got to where we are today because we have a capacity, dare I say tendency, to be violently dominating of everything around us. Chances are a pacifistic race ain't exactly going to survive long enough to develop into an advanced civilization, meaning most races out there at our level and beyond will have some serious hostility behind them to have survived as long as they have.

Sure, I was pulling the number of out my ass, but my reasoning is logical.

[redsniper]

But that's only based on our own experiences here on Earth. How can we even begin to guess at what alien life will be like?

[Mefustae]

We're dealing with simple natural selection and evolution in a competitive environment. It's pretty safe to assume that this would be the same regardless of the location. It only gets weird in special circumstances, like designed or genetically engineered ecosystems.

Anyway, when you think about it without any other considerations, it's always going to be 50/50 whether or not an alien race will be hostile or peaceful. When you take into consideration the requirements needed for a civilization to survive long enough to reach Class 1, that is when you have to factor in aggression and other behavioral factors that boost survivability. Hence, it would be logical to assume that there is an increased chance that an advanced civilization would be aggressive rather than peaceful. Hell, look at humanity!

[Mr. Vega]

You're full of ****. Aggressiveness also increases the chance that an advanced species will destroy itself. When resources are scarce and conditions are harsh, aggressiveness will only supply a limited and short term advantage - species that rely upon cooperation and sacrifice will destroy more aggressive, individualistic ones. This is why any species that survives long enough to make it into outer space can only be so aggressive, and I'm pretty damn sure we're at the high end of that spectrum (if of course, we do make it).

[Mefustae]

You're full of ****. Aggressiveness also increases the chance that an advanced species will destroy itself. When resources are scarce and conditions are harsh, aggressiveness will only supply a limited and short term advantage - species that rely upon cooperation and sacrifice will destroy more aggressive, individualistic ones. This is why any species that survives long enough to make it into outer space can only be so aggressive, and I'm pretty damn sure we're at the high end of that spectrum (if of course, we do make it).

I'm glad you picked up on that, I was just thinking about that very same issue when I posted earlier. Yes, an overly aggressive species will likely wipe itself out before it can achieve Class 1, but that doesn't detract from aggression still providing a credible survival advantage. Using your example, a cooperative species will always win out over an individualistic one, but a more aggressive cooperative species will in turn out-compete all others.

[Mr. Vega]

And you're also assuming that life on other planets is enough like our own that this sort of competition happens there as it does here. There are going to be species where the environment is going to be the only danger, and not other life forms. Remember how the Dodo didn't run when it saw a dog or a hunter with a gun, because it didn't have any natural predators where it lived and thus had evolved no inclination to fear anything?

[Mr. Vega]

You're full of ****. Aggressiveness also increases the chance that an advanced species will destroy itself. When resources are scarce and conditions are harsh, aggressiveness will only supply a limited and short term advantage - species that rely upon cooperation and sacrifice will destroy more aggressive, individualistic ones. This is why any species that survives long enough to make it into outer space can only be so aggressive, and I'm pretty damn sure we're at the high end of that spectrum (if of course, we do make it).

I'm glad you picked up on that, I was just thinking about that very same issue when I posted earlier. Yes, an overly aggressive species will likely wipe itself out before it can achieve Class 1, but that doesn't detract from aggression still providing a credible survival advantage. Using your example, a cooperative species will always win out over an individualistic one, but a more aggressive cooperative species will in turn out-compete all others.

I'm just saying there's gonna be a limit to how aggressive they can be, and it also means they'll be capable of realizing that there's a "become friends" response in addition to the "KILL KILL KILL" response when meeting a new intelligent species.

[IceFire]

Vega has a very good point.  Survival of the fittest works in a number of different ways.  Humans have allot of aggressive behavior built into us which used to make us pretty good hunters but we're also a very social animal and have the ability for such things as self sacrifice and compassion.  These aren't useless attributes that we somehow worked into ourselves through being civilized...its all hardwired - some people more than others.  Its beneficial to have aggressive tendencies to get where we are but there are other attributes that operate as a counter or an equal that are also important.  If you're too aggressive then it becomes hard to form large groups as there will be too much fighting.

A thought I've had is that over the centuries where the species goes from being an aggressive hunter/gatherer towards full fledged worldwide civilization its likely that attributes that go along with working together and operating within society will take precedence over some of the others.  But really its a balancing act that probably goes 50/50 most of the time with some people in the 51/49 range.  So its very hard to say what an advanced civilization would operate like...or if we project the same thing onto ourselves in say three or four millennia.  I suspect we'll be somewhat like we are right now actually.

[Flipside]

The problems comes from the fact that humans not only form groups naturally, but form hierarchical groups, that means there are always those who feel they were designed to be at the top of the pyramid. Unfortunately, there's a clash of Brains vs Brawn, once upon a time, Brawn decided who was in charge, and it still causes a problem these days.

From the point of the Shivans, it could be that there is no such inter-competition for position. However, even bees do not go out and sting everything they encounter, they even have symbiotic relations with some other insects.

[Mr. Vega]

We should be a little careful of assuming that the societies of Eurasian civilizations are the ones natural to us.

[Flipside]

Well, even if you trace it back to primate level, that 'strongest leads' group structure is still in place. Though I will admit that one of our closest primate relatives, the Bonobo monkey, doesn't actually use violence (they use sex instead) and have a Matriarchal society, which just goes to show.

[Kosh]

I don't think it should matter if it was a real signal or not, we really need to start building GTD Orion class destroyers and try to discover subspace so that in the event we are "discovered", we're ready.

[ShadowGorrath]

I don't think it should matter if it was a real signal or not, we really need to start building GTD Orion class destroyers and try to discover subspace so that in the event we are "discovered", we're ready.

And then pull of a Terran-Vasudan war while we're at it ? 

[Kosh]

Damn straight, if any of them dirty Zods start poking around, we must be ready to give them hell!

[redsniper]

The real cause of the T-V war was suspicion originally caused by a 320-year-old video game. TIME PARADOX.

[Snail]

And the nukes...? MIRV strikes would hardly work against a target in space.

[Bobboau]

sure they would if you had them set up to detonate on (or slightly after) impact.